MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157717773 · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-0028

Analysis of Over 10,000 Cases Finds No Association between Previously Reported Candidate Polymorphisms and Ovarian Cancer Outcome

2013· article· en· W2157717773 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kristin L. White, Robert A. Vierkant, Zachary C. Fogarty, Bridget Charbonneau, Matthew S. Block, Paul D.P. Pharoah, Georgia Chenevix‐Trench, Mary Anne Rossing, Daniel W. Cramer, Celeste Leigh Pearce, Joellen M. Schildkraut, Usha Menon, Susanne K. Kjær, Douglas A. Levine, Jacek Gronwald, Hoda Anton Culver, Alice S. Whittemore, Beth Y. Karlan, Diether Lambrechts, Nicolas Wentzensen, Jolanta Kupryjańczyk, Jenny Chang‐Claude, Elisa V. Bandera, Estrid Høgdall, Florian Heitz, Stanley B. Kaye, Peter A. Fasching, Ian Campbell, Marc T. Goodman, Tanja Pejović, Yukie T. Bean, Galina Lurie, Diana Eccles, Alexander Hein, Matthias W. Beckmann, Arif B. Ekici, James Paul, Robert Brown, James M. Flanagan, Philipp Harter, Andreas du Bois, Ira Schwaab, Claus Høgdall, Lene Lundvall, Sara H. Olson, Irene Orlow, Lisa E. Paddock, Anja Rudolph, Ursula Eilber, Agnieszka Dansonka‐Mieszkowska, Iwona K. Rzepecka, Izabela Ziółkowska-Seta, Louise A. Brinton, Hannah Yang, Montserrat García‐Closas, Evelyn Despierre, Sandrina Lambrechts, Ignace Vergote, Christine Walsh, Jenny Lester, Weiva Sieh, Valerie McGuire, Joseph H. Rothstein, Argyrios Ziogas, Jan Lubiński, Cezary Cybulski, Janusz Menkiszak, Allan Jensen, Simon A. Gayther, Susan J. Ramus, Aleksandra Gentry‐Maharaj, Andrew Berchuck, Anna H. Wu, Malcolm C. Pike, David Van DenBerg, Kathryn L. Terry, Allison F. Vitonis, Jennifer A. Doherty, Sharon E. Johnatty, Anna DeFazio, Honglin Song, Jonathan P. Tyrer, Thomas A. Sellers, Catherine M. Phelan, Kimberly R. Kalli, Julie M. Cunningham, Brooke L. Fridley, Ellen L. Goode

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthCancer Research UK
KeywordsOvarian cancerSingle-nucleotide polymorphismOncologyMedicineCancerInternal medicineGenotypeSNPProportional hazards modelERCC1Survival analysisDiseaseGenetic associationBioinformaticsGenome-wide association studyBiologyGeneticsDNA repairGeneNucleotide excision repair

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death among women. In an effort to understand contributors to disease outcome, we evaluated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) previously associated with ovarian cancer recurrence or survival, specifically in angiogenesis, inflammation, mitosis, and drug disposition genes. METHODS: Twenty-seven SNPs in VHL, HGF, IL18, PRKACB, ABCB1, CYP2C8, ERCC2, and ERCC1 previously associated with ovarian cancer outcome were genotyped in 10,084 invasive cases from 28 studies from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium with over 37,000-observed person-years and 4,478 deaths. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the association between candidate SNPs and ovarian cancer recurrence or survival with and without adjustment for key covariates. RESULTS: We observed no association between genotype and ovarian cancer recurrence or survival for any of the SNPs examined. CONCLUSIONS: These results refute prior associations between these SNPs and ovarian cancer outcome and underscore the importance of maximally powered genetic association studies. IMPACT: These variants should not be used in prognostic models. Alternate approaches to uncovering inherited prognostic factors, if they exist, are needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207